HC Deb 19 December 1966 vol 738 cc972-6
8. Mr. Eldon Griffiths

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what investigation he made in Moscow of methods of handling files at the British Embassy.

9. Mr. Onslow

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is satisfied with the standard of security in Her Majesty's diplomatic missions overseas; and if he will make a statement.

72. Mr. Michael Foot

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether authentic copies of the following treaties are still in possession of the Foreign Office, namely the Treaty of Utrecht, the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, the Treaty of Versailles, and the Treaty of Sevres.

80. Mr. Dickens

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the disappearance of certain documents relating to the Zinoviev Affair, the Hoare-Laval Pact and the Munich Agreement.

Mr. George Brown

In answering the four Questions together, I apologise for the fact that my Answer must therefore be a little longer than I normally like to give.

I have been concerned about the method of handling files in the Foreign Office and in missions abroad. Following a review which has been in progress for some time, I have instituted certain changes in procedure which will I think offer an improvement.

All the documents referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot) are in the Public Record Office.

The file relating to the Zinoviev affair contains our original copy of the Zinoviev letter itself together with the texts of the final versions of the communications arising out of it which passed with M. Rakowski. It is in respect of the letter to M. Rakowski of 24th October that the file is deficient. Two copies of the letter existed, differing only in their signature. This was made plain in 1927 in the corrigendum slip to the White Paper Command 2895. We have the copy with the incorrect signature; the other, and the, operative draft, are both missing.

The Hoare Laval Agreement was never concluded but the Foreign Office working papers are in the Public Record Office. The authenticated copy of the English text of the Munich Agreement is also in the Public Record Office.

Mr. Griffiths

I thank the Foreign Secretary for answering a Question that I for one did not ask him. May I revert to the Question that was on the Order Paper about his investigation of a security file in Moscow during his visit to Moscow? While I accept that it is right for the Foreign Secretary to check up on sloppiness and security lapses, can he say how this matter was made public in Moscow? Is it not very much better if one is checking up on security matters to keep quiet about it?

Mr. Brown

Perhaps the hon. Member would like to read his Question again. It says nothing about security in Moscow. [An HON. MEMBER: "Of course it does."] The Question is what investigation the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs made in Moscow of methods of handling files. [An HON. MEMBER: "At the British Embassy."] What else could it be in Moscow but the British Embassy? I answered the Question in the form in which the hon. Gentleman put it down. I am quite willing to believe that he intended to put down a different Question, but I answered the one he asked and I I said that I was not satisfied. I was concerned. Having been concerned, apparently unlike my predecessors I made an investigation. I have therefore now also taken action to improve the situation.

Mr. Onslow

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly reply to my hon. Friend's supplementary question? Would he not agree that in cases of this kind no useful purpose is served if the matter becomes public knowledge?

Mr. Brown

Anybody who is responsible for an organisation of this size, whether it is business, trade union or Government, knows that at any stage if one is to get one's views carried all the way down one must make them clear all the way down. That is what I am doing.

Mr. Foot

While we are all very concerned that there should be proper handling of the files at the British Embassy in Moscow, may I ask my right hon. Friend to appreciate that we are even more concerned about interference by the Central Office of the Conservative Party with the files in this country of the Foreign Office? While we appreciate that my right hon. Friend is not responsible for the loss of these documents and are very grateful that he is carrying out an investigation at long last, may we ask him to take into account that we are very much concerned about what happened on the Zinoviev letter and the fact that Foreign Office officials may have been operating against the interests of the Government at that time? Will he make a full investigation into that matter and report to the House?

Mr. Brown

I thought that I had answered it clearly in my reply, but let me again make one thing clear. The Zinoviev letter, the copy of which came to the Foreign Office in 1924, is still there. It has never been missing, and some very fanciful stories which I read over the weekend could never have been written if the facts had been checked.

Mr. Dickens

Nevertheless, will my right hon. Friend undertake to carry out an investigation into allegations that the Zinoviev letter itself was a forgery, and will he extend the investigation to include the possibility of collusion in October, 1924, between the Foreign Office and members of the party opposite during that critical General Election? Secondly—

Mr. Speaker

Order. There are a lot of important Questions on the Order Paper. We must be brief.

Mr. Brown

Authenticity of the Zinoviev letter does not really arise on these Questions. On the other hand, without attributing any wrong motives to anybody present today, I am not at all surprised that the Conservative Central Office thought it worth paying £5,000 for a document in 1924.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Will the Foreign Secretary make sure that this record of absolute unscrupulous villainy on the part of the Central Office of the Conservative Party, when £5,000 was paid for a forgery—these are grave disclosures—does not rest there?

Mr. Brown

One of the reasons why I have taken pains to look carefully into the way in which we handle our affairs is to see that we, unlike our predecessors, do not lose interesting documents.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home

Whatever may be the history of this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman as Foreign Secretary acquit the Foreign Office of any collusion with any political party?

Mr. Brown

If the right hon. Gentleman cares to put down a Question about the authenticity of the letter and about what happened in those days—it is not on the Order Paper today—I shall be very happy to give him an Answer.